1

The Role of Teachers’ nonverbal Communication in ELT
Classroom
Abstrac
t

Janak Singh Negi

The role of non-verbal behavour in English classroom plays an important role for teaching
content and skills. Based on this assumption, this article attempts to shed light on this
hitherto unexplored area of research in the Nepalese context based on the observation by
the author at various higher secondary schools in Nepal. The findings show that teachers’
non-verbal behaviors play a highly important and essential role on learners’ motivation in
language classroom.

Key words: non-verbal communication, paralanguage, information
processing
Introduction
Communication, which is used in everyday
life from greeting a stranger to touching a
lover, is an ongoing process of sending and
receiving messages that enables human to
share
knowledge,
ideas,
thoughts,
information,
feelings,
emotions,
and

attitudes. It requires a medium in which the
communicated information is understood by
both sender and receiver. There are two
media, verbal and non-verbal, which are
simultaneously used for communication. To
be successful in communication it requires
us to be both competent and experienced,
not only in verbal communication but also in
non-verbal one as well; because much of our
communication takes place at the non verbal
level. It cannot be an exception for ELT
classroom as well because communication
takes place there. Now question may arise
what the non-verbal communication (NVC) is.

Communication takes various forms, one of
which is oral or speech. However, when
people speak, they normally do not confine
themselves to the mere emission of words.
Furthermore, they also use their hands,
(gestures), head moments, eyes (eye
contact), lips (smile), bodily postures and
symbols to communicate which always
accompany oral

Non-verbal Communication
Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009



2
discourse-intended or not. The impact of
these non- linguistic cues in conversation is
called non-verbal communication (NVC). It
includes the ‘messages other than words that
people exchange’ (Gregersen, 2007, p. 52).
In this definition, messages are seen as
symbolic, which are ‘Silent infiltrators . . .
that provide us with a mode for conveying
messages without the use of verbal language
(Dunn, 1999, p. 1). Going through these
definitions we can say that non- verbal
communication is the process of one person
stimulating meaning in the mind of another
person or persons by means of non-linguistic
cues e.g. facial expressions, gestures etc.
which can be synthesized in the words of
experiences, feelings, and attitudes either
singly or in combination with verbal
behaviors
in
the
exchange
and
interpretation of messages within a given
situation or context and tell us about
whether verbal messages are true, joking,
serious, threatening and so on. The following
differences between verbal and non-verbal
communication will make this even clear.

First, the majorities of non- verbal behaviors
(NVBs) are intuitive
and
based on
normative rules. There are not any clear-cut
linguistic
structures
for
non-verbal
communication. On the other hand, ‘verbal
communication is highly structured and
reinforced through an extensive formal and
informal learning process’ (Harris, 2002,
p.153). Second, verbal communication is
confined to the use of language. On the
contrary, NVC delivers a message beyond
the words. For the analysis, this is a useful
division.
However,
‘nonverbal
communication is so inextricably bound up
with verbal aspects of the communication
process that we can only separate them
artificially’ (Knapp, 1972, p. v). In a nutshell,
we can say that NVC is fewer rules bound
than verbal communication and is judged

Miller (1988) who defined non- verbal
communication as ‘Communication without
words. . . it includes overt behaviors such as

facial expressions, eyes, touching and tone
of voice, as well as less obvious messages
such as dress, postures and spatial distance
between two or more people’ (p. 3). ‘It
includes both behavior and communication’
(Hickson and Stacks, 1993, p.5). In this
article, I have also used the term, non-verbal
communication and non-verbal behaviors
interchangeably. We can say that it is a
process whereby people, through intentional
or unintentional manipulation of normative
actions and expectations express

more by the situational variables than the
absolute correctness of the behavior.

Forms of Non-verbal Communication
Various forms of NVC that are used in language
classroom include: kinesics, facial expressions,
oculesics, haptics, proxemics, paralanguage,
chronemics, physical appearance, olfactics,
environmental factors and so on. Kinesics looks
at bodily postures, facial expressions such as
smile, frown, wrinkling the bow etc; and
movements of the head and limbs whereas
oculesics
looks
at the influence of visual
contacts on the perceived massage that is
communicated. Eye movement and eye contact

as Khan (2001) says depict the focus, direction
and duration of gaze in relation to other
participants. For example, our eyes narrow when
we are concentrating and pupils dilate when we
are excited.
Haptics
describes
touching
behaviors. This category consists of physical
contacts such as handshakes, patting on the
shoulders and so on, whereas proxemics what
Menninen and Kujanpaa (2002, p.3) call ‘spatial
behavior’ is the ‘physical

Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009


3
distance we place between ourselves
and others’ (Helmer and Eddy, 2003,
p.43), which indicates whether the
relationship among the interlocutors is
personal?
social
or
public?
And
paralanguage is concerned with the
non-verbal audio part of speech such as

tone, pitch, intonation and pause etc
which come alongside spoken language.
Masterson (1996) and Boyd (2000)
describe these as ‘vocalics’. Finally we
come to physical appearance which
refers to the attributes of image such as
attractiveness, height, weight, body
shape, hair style, and dress and so on.
These attributes can be classified into
two categories: controllable e.g. clothes,
hair style etc and less controllable e.g.
skin color, height, body shape etc; on
the
contrary
olfactics
looks
at
interpersonal communication through
smell which is concerned with scents or
odor that comes from the perfumes and
bodily hygiene. At last we come to
chronemics, the study of the meanings,
usages and communication of time,
punctuality
and
so
on
and
environmental factors which refers to


the environmental setting e.g. pollutions,
temperature, noise etc.

The Functions of Nonverbal Communication
By function of non-verbal communication
what is meant is the message that the NVC
cues convey. Non-verbal behaviors occur
simultaneously with the verbal message and
they substitute, complement, regulate and
contradict
the
verbal
message.
Substitution of non-verbal message occurs
when a non-verbal cue is used instead of
verbal one. For example, a head node to
indicate’ yes’, pat on shoulder to show
‘intimacy’ and so on. Non-verbal behaviors
also compliment, expand or modify the
verbal message. For example, a teacher
looking confident while delivering the lecture
in the class enhances the quality of teaching.
Non-verbal
message
regulate
the
conversational flow as well. For example,
gestures, head movements and many other
behaviors indicate how the interaction
should progress. The regulatory function as

Capper (2003) says also serves to provide
vital cues for the learners’ interpretation of
speech acts and considerably enhance
conversation. Finally, non-verbal cues also

contradict verbal message as in the case of
‘irony’ and ‘satire’. In a nutshell, non-verbal
communication
expresses
happiness,
sadness, surprise, intimacy, seriousness,
satire, formality, informality and so on via
the use of various non-linguistic cues.

Principles of Non-verbal
Communication
Non-verbal behaviors are innate and
universal
i.e. people in different cultures have a
common understanding of non-verbal cues;
however the total meaning of discourse can
be culturally determined and
differ
in
different countries. For example, as Davis
(1990)
says
Caucasian
schoolteachers


associate students’ avoidance of
eye
contact with deception, whereas Asian
students see such avoidance as a sign of
respect.
Most of the non-verbal behaviors are
involuntary. For example, facial expressions
such as blushing, sweating or yawning etc.
are largely beyond the control of the
individual. In such a case, the context and
power relationships among participants play
the vital role.
Non-verbal
communication
uses
wide
varieties of non-linguistic cues such as bodily
postures,
facial expressions, touching
behaviors and so on simultaneously with the
linguistic ones. These behaviors may change

Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009


4
over time and across generations due to the
changing cultural factors. For example,
Nepalese male and female students in past

did not use to sit together in the classroom.
They even felt shy while talking but
nowadays they shake their hands, sit and
walk together. The role of non- verbal
communication also ‘vary depending on the
age,
sex,
and
the
various
culture
involved’(Harris, 2002, p. 155).
Sometimes non-verbal behaviors may be
expressed beyond the face to face
conversation as in the case of telephone
conversation. In such a case NVC is
expressed via paralanguage.

Importance of NVC in ELT Classroom
Teacher creates more impression through
NVC in the classroom than the knowledge of
subject matter
and verbal fluency. There is a language
of body
expression and motion that plays a pivotal
role in the language classroom. Research
studies done in

classroom environments also suggest that
non- verbal behaviors send clear and distinct

messages. Moreover, these ‘non-verbal
messages can be a more explicit and candid
means of determining intent than merely
the spoken word alone’ (Rosa, 2000,
p. 1). Furthermore, Woolfolk and Brooks
(1983) indicated that non-verbal behavior
often influence the demeanor of teachers
and students. Actually the success of both
the student and teacher depends upon the
effective communication between them in
the class, but communication becomes
handicapped without the proper use of nonverbal behaviors. In this regard, Stevick
(1982) points out that:
The body language of a teacher is the most
important thing in the class... it is the way
you use your eyes, the distance you stand
from your students, the way you touch or
refrain from touching them all of these
unnoticeable things in the class carry
important signals which create a profound
effect on your students’ feelings of welcome
and comfort with you (p. 6).
In general, it is true that NVC accounts for a
large
part
of
meaningful
human
communication. Actions, such as facial
display, eye contact, body language or the

way we wear our clothes, make hair style
etc. speak louder than words and often help
others make accurate judgments about our
thoughts, feelings and intentions because
they ‘set the scene for total communication’
(Mey, 1993, p. 224) and provide significant
information about others emotional states’
(Maxim and Nowicki, 2003, p.745), which is
also supported by Mehrabian (1971) who
claims that 93 per cent of the emotional
meaning is transmitted as follows: 7 per cent
is verbal expression, 38 per cent is vocal
expression, and 55 per cent is facial
expression (p.44 ). Thus, we can say that
even if ‘we speak with our vocal organs. . .
we converse with our entire bodies,

Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009


5
conversation consists of much more than a
simple interchange of spoken words’
Abercrombie (1973, p. 31). If we see different
models of communicative competence we
can easily access the significance of NVC.
rules were useless. Among many things
needed for communicative competence,
were

also
the
rules
of
non-verbal
communication of target language. Thus, he
highlighted the rules of NVC as important as
other grammar rules for learning a second
language.
Canale
and
Swain
(1980)
developed another model of communicative
competence, which includes three main
competencies: grammatical competence,
sociolinguistic competence and strategic
competence. In this model non-verbal
communication
strategies
are
highly
emphasized
in
strategic
competence
(Khaniya, 2005, p. 27). Since the goal of
language teaching is to develop
the
communicative competence, it becomes

handicapped without the proper use of NVC
and if we become aware of NVC, it may
certainly enhance effective communication.
Non-verbal behaviors, which are more subtle
and can be used more often in the classroom
are also the sign of psychological state of the
teacher and should not be taken lightly. If the
teachers’ non-verbal behaviors are positive
students enjoy the lecture and highly
motivated to the teacher and the subject
matter, on the other hand if the non verbal
behaviors are negative students feel
discomfort and may not be motivated to the
subject matter and the teacher.

Hymes (1972), introduced the concept of
communicative competence back in 1960s,
believed that there were certain rules of
use without which the linguistic or grammar

of Effective Teachers of At-risk African American
Male Middle School Students. His study revealed
that when effective teachers interacted with the
at-risk African-American-male middle school
students, they frequently were in close proximity,
changed their voice inflections, established eye
contact, invaded students’ territories (were
within two feet), and gestured to students. The
same year, Rosa (2000) conducted the research
on Understanding the role and potential impact

of non-verbal communication in the primary
inclusion classroom the purpose of which was
to

Review of Related Literature
Non-verbal communication is a fundamental
aspect of human life from the moment we
enter
the world. Since then a number of
NVC research have been carried out. Some
of the recently carried out research in this
field include: Boyd (2000), who carried out
the research entitled Non-verbal Behaviors
Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009


6
compare the non-verbal behaviors of
students who are considered average in
ability with those who are perceived as
cognitively challenged while they are
engaged in regular classroom instruction
in both large and small groups settings.
Her finding shows that in most of the
cases the majority of non- verbal
interaction occurred between students
who sat in close proximity regardless of
their
cognitive

ability.
Likewise,
Christopher (2002), Lewis (2005) and
Hassan (2007) carried out researches on
Nonverbal
Communications.
Christopher reached at the finding that
males displayed more active non- verbal
behavior than females; the result by
Lewis showed that female students make
eye contact more than the male
students and smile more often in the
classroom setting; and the study by
Hassan showed that the college students
are not only conscious of their teachers’
NVC but are also biased towards certain
types of non-verbal cues and behaviors.
The present study is mainly based on the
research carried out by the author in
2009.

The Study
This article is an extract from the research
entitled
Teachers’
Non-verbal
Communication and its Impact on the
Learners’ Motivation carried by the author at
the Department of English Education,
Tribhuvan University, Nepal (2009) in partial

fulfillment for his Master’s Degree (M.Ed.) in
English Education. The research was carried
out to identify the teachers’ most frequently
used non- verbal behaviors and find out its
impact on the learners’ motivation in the ELT
classroom. (But in this article only second
part is addressed) The sample population of
10 teachers and 80 (40 males
40 females) students were purposively
selected from 10 different Higher Secondary
Schools of the Kathmandu valley. The
researcher used both the questionnaire
(Appendix A) and the observation forms (not
included in this article) as tools in the
study that consisted of the components of
non-verbal communication
such
as
kinesics,
facial expressions, oculesics,
proxemics,
physical
appearance,
paralanguage; and chronemics used in the
classroom.

Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009



Results
The following table shows the students’ reaction to their teachers’ nonverbal behaviors. The Students’ Reaction to their Teachers’ Non-verbal
Behaviors.
(Numerical after M= male and F= female indicates the number of students)
S.N
.
Jo
ur
na
l
of
N
EL
TA
Vo
l.
1
4
N
o.
12
D
ec
e
m
b

01
2
3.

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Scena
rio
Smiling teachers teach more effectively than
those who are al- ways
serious.
It is easy to speak in front of those teachers who
usually encour- age students by
nodding their head.
Students feel nervous and embarrassed when
the teacher indi- cates a particular student
while asking the question
It is hard to speak in front of those teachers who
stare their stu- dents coldly.
My friends avoid eye contacts when they do not
know the answer of the question
asked.
I pay more attention when the teacher makes eye
contacts with me in the class.
Teachers makes eye contacts only with the
talented students.
Teachers tend to look away when a difficult topic
is being dis- cussed.

9.


My friends never take those closes seriously
whose teachers are irregular or
unpunctual.
10. My friends see their wrist watch when the teacher
takes over time in the class.
11

The attractive personality and friendly style also
contribute to teachers’ success and
our learning.

Strongly
agree

Agree

NAND1*

24 (30%)
M
–
F
24

56 (70%)
M
40
F
16


M
F

-

32 (40%)
M
F

24 (30%)
M
F

M
F

47 (58.75%)
M
16
F
31

33(41.25%)
M
24
F
9

M

F

47 (58.75%)
M
16
F
31
66 (82.5%)
M
34
F
32

33(41.25%)
M
24
F
9
7 (8.75%)
M
4
F
3

M
F
7 8.75%)
M
2
F

5

66 (82.5%)
M
34
F
32
66 (82.5%)
M
34
F
32
52 (65%)
M
17
F
25
48 (60%)
M
16
F
32

7 (8.75%)
M
4
F
3
7 (8.75%)
M

4
F
3
14 (17.5%)
M
5
F
9
24 (30%)
M
16
F
8

7 8.75%)
M
2
F
5
7 8.75%)
M
2
F
5
14(17.5%)
M
8
F
6
8 (10%)

M
F
8

44 (55%)
M
26
F
18
80 (100%)
M
40
F
40

16 (20%)
M
5
F
11
M
F
-

3 3.75%)
M
F
3
M
F

-

–
–

-

Disagree

M
F
M
F

-

M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F


-

–
–

-

Strongly
disagree
M
–
F
–
M
F

-

M
F

-

M
F

-

M

F

-

M
F

-

M
F

-

M
F

-

M
F

6 (7.5%)
M
6
F
M
F
-


-

-

11(16.75%)
M
3
F
8
M
F
-

10
5


12.
13.
14
15
Jo
ur
na
l
of
N
EL
TA
Vo

l.
1
4
N
o.
12
D
ec
e
m
b

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

My friends do not pay attention in the lecture
when the teacher appears to be fatigued
and exhausted.
Attractive teachers are very intelligent and
teach well.
We enjoy the lecture of those teachers more who
are physically smart, attractive and well
dressed.
Sitting close to the teacher in the front row helps
students in under- standing the

lecture more.
My friends feel bore in those classes where the
teacher teaches in a monotonous
tone.
Poor teachers make sounds such/a:/ time and
again while ex- plaining the subject
matter.
Teachers movement in the classroom keeps
students active
Students become more active if they are asked
questions and in- volved in
discussions.
Students like those teachers who summarize the
lesson at the end.
I like those teachers who illustrate the subject
matter.
I like those teachers who always give an
assignment/homework.

23

My friends like those teachers who tell the jokes
and make us laugh.

24

My friends like those teachers who ask questions
time and again in the class.

25


We like to work in pair/group in the classroom
rather than listen- ing to the lectures
all the times.

48(60%)
M
25
F
23

27(33.75%)
M
12
F
15

5(6.25%)
M
3
F
2

M
F

M
F
49 (61.25%)
M

20
F
29

M
F
5 (6.25%)
M
F
5

8 (10%)
M
8
F
14(17.5%)
M
8
F
6

29(36.25%)
M
13
F
16
12 (15%)
M
12
F

-

50 (62.5%)
M
17
F
33

22 (27.5%)
M
15
F
7

M
F

40 (50%)
M
24
F
16

24 (30%)
M
16
F
8

16 (20%)

M
F
16

M
F

56 (70%)
M
29
F
27

10 (12.5%)
M
6
F
4

14(17.5%)
M
5
F
9

M
F

64 (80%)
M

24
F
40
64 (80%)
M
24
F
40

8 (10%)
M
8
F
16 (20%)
M
16
F
-

58 (72.5%)
M
30
F
28
80 (100%)
M
40
F
40
43 (53.75%)

M
15
F
28
69 (86.25%)
M
32
F
37
17 (21.23%)
M
7
F
10
M
28
F
30

22 (27.5%)
M
10
F
12
M
F
3 (3.75%)
M
3
F

11(13.75%)
M
8
F
3
22 (27.5%)
M
10
F
12
M
6
F
4

M
F
M
F
M
F

-

-

-

M
F


-

M
F

-

M
F

-

M
F

M
F
5 (6.25%)
M
F
5
M
F
4 (5%)
M
F
4
M
2

F
3

-

-

M
F

10
6

43(53.75%)
M
19
F
24
M
F
-

-

M
F

-

M

F

-

M
F

-

M
F

-

M
F

-

M
F

M
F
15(18.75%)
M
8
F
7
M

F
12 (15%)
M
4
F
8
M
4
F
3

-

8 (10%)
-

-

M
F
14 (17.5%)
M
14
F
M
F
25(31.25%)
M
19
F

6
M
F
-


9
Discussion

sensitive in this case and (82.5%) liked to sit
close (near) to their teachers. Students liked
those teachers who illustrated the subject
matter and summarized the lesson at the
end; made them laugh in the classroom and
became more active if they were asked
questions and involved in discussion but
they felt boredom in the class where teacher
taught in a monotonous tone.

Students (100 %) liked teachers’ smile.
Analysis showed that the female students’
(60% S.A. = Strongly Agreed) motivation to
teachers smile was greater than the males
but they felt difficulties to speak in front of
those teachers who stared at them coldly.
Females
(77.5%
S.A.)
were
highly

demotivated to such teachers than the
males. Students (70% S.A.) were encouraged
to speak in front of those teachers who
encouraged their students by nodding their
heads. In this regard, male students’ (60%)
motivation to teachers’ head node was
greater than the females, where as majority
of the students (58.75% S.A.) felt nervous
and embarrassed when the teacher indicated
the particular student with their raised
finger, females (77.5%) were slightly more
demotivated to such teachers than the
males. Students (especially females) avoided
eye contacts when they did not know the
answer of the question asked but they
(91.25%) paid more attention when the
teacher made eye contacts with them.
Students (90%) did not take those classes
seriously, whose teachers were irregular and
unpunctual.
Teachers’
punctuality
also
influenced in gender; female students were
more conscious than the males in this
matter. But they (75%) looked at their
wristwatch when the teacher took the over
time in the class. Male students (65% S.A.)
were found less patient than the females in
the classroom. Students (100%) were highly

motivated to the attractive personality and
friendly style of the teachers. They also
believed that attractive and frank teachers
really enhance their learning. Handsomeness
of the teachers did not count with their
intelligence but students (67.5%) were
motivated to the attractive, smart outlook
and sense of well dress of teachers.
Furthermore, female students (72.5% S.A.)
were more influenced by these features of
teachers
than
the
males.
Teachers’
movement in the classroom kept students
(90%) active. Females (100%) were more
Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009


10
Major Findings
The analysis showed that students had both
the positive and negative impact from their
teachers’ non-verbal communication.
i. Students were highly motivated to the
teachers who smiled at them, made them
laugh in the classroom, and illustrated the
subject matter but felt difficulties to deal with

the teacher who stared at them coldly and
indicated a particular student with their
raised finger.
ii. Students became more active if the
teacher kept movements in the classroom
and made the frequent eye contact with
them.

Recommendations
Teachers should smile and node their heads
to encourage their students while talking to
them so that they (students) could share
their difficulties, problems and so on with
their teachers.
Teachers can make their students active by
keeping movements in the classroom,
making frequent eye contacts with them;
become aware of their NVBs, it certainly
helps them (teachers) to become more
proficient at receiving students’ messages as
well as more proficient at sending accurate
messages.
Janak Singh Negi is currently the Vice- Campus
Chief and Lecturer of linguistics and ELT at
Manilek
Campus
affiliated
to
Tribhuvan
University Nepal. He has been involved in

Teaching English, Teacher Training; and
monitoring at various parts of Nepal. Mr. Negi
is also a life member of NELTA and has served
on teacher Training and monitoring for it;
associated with British
Council.
He is
particularly interested in innovative action
research for teacher development and young
learners in finding methods and techniques to
make language teaching and learning more
motivating and engaging for them He holds an
M.Ed. degree in English Language Teaching
from Tribhuvan University Nepal and Teacher
training course from the British Council.

References

interacting with them by asking some
questions and involving them in discussion.
Good teachers are attractive, smart, and
frank
and make students laugh in the
classroom. They illustrate the subject matter
and never forget to summarize the lesson at
the end and do not stare and frown at them
in the classroom. So try to be a good teacher.

Conclusion
Non verbal communication is not only crucial

in
a plain daily communication; it is also
equally important for class room situations
as well. NVC, which takes various forms,
illustrates or replaces certain aspects of
hearers’ brain that deals with the emotional
part of the message. Various non- verbal
behaviors of language teachers’ in classroom
discussed in this article so far had both the
positive and negative impact on their
learners’ motivation. Normally, teachers
constantly clarify, explain or discuss ideas;
concepts and so on or simply define new
terms to their students or interact with them
verbally. Along with verbal behaviour if
teachers
Abercrombie, D. (1973). Paralinguistic communication. In
Allen, J.P.B. and Corder S.P. (eds.) The Edinburgh
course in applied linguistics, Vol. 1. pp. (31-36).
Boyd,

F.D. (2000). Non-verbal behavior of effective
teachers of at-risk African American male middle
school students. An Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.

Capper, S. (2000). Non-verbal communication and
the second language learner: Some pedagogic
considerations. />articles/2000/05/capper.

Christopher, E. (2002). Gender differences in non-verbal
behavior. Retrieved from />internet/psych/theses/seniors2002/christopher/
webpage.html
Davis,L. (1990).Where do we stand. In Gardner, P.S.
(eds.).New direction: reading, writing and critical
thinking. New York: CUP.
Dunn, L.J. (1969). Non-verbal communication: information
conveyed through the use of body language.

Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009


11
Missouri: Department of Psychology. Missouri
Western State University.
Gregersen, T.S. (2007). Language learning beyond
words: Incorporating body language into
classroom activities. Journal of Reflections on
English language teaching, Vol. 6, pp. 51-64.
Harris,

T.E.
(2002).
Applied
organizational
communication: Principles and pragmatics
for
future
practice. London: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associate Publishers.

Hassan, M.M.T. (2007). Non-verbal communication:
The language of motivation for Pakistani
students.

In Journal of Language in India. Volume 7, Aug.
2007.
Helmer, S. & Eddy, C. (2003). Look at me when I talk
to
you. Toronto: Pippin Publishing
Corporation.
Hickson,M. & Stacks, D. (1993).
communication: Studies and
Dubuque: Wm.C.Brown.

Non-verbal
application.

Hymes, D.H.C. (1972). On communicative competence. In
Pride,
J.B. & Holmes. J (eds). Sociolinguistics. England:
Penguin Books Ltd.
Khan, A.A. (2001). Non-verbal communication : Fact
and
fiction.
Retrieved
from
angehorizons.
com/2001/20010226/nonverbal.shtml#top.

Khaniya, T.R. (2005). Examination for enhanced
learning. Lalitpur: Millennium Publication (P)
Ltd.
Knapp, M. (1972). Non-verbal communication in
human interaction. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
Lewis,

T.N.
(2005).
Gender
and
non-verbal
communication in the foreign language
classroom. tnlewis@ucdavis. edu..

Manninen, T. & Kujanpaa, T. (2002). Non-verbal
communication forms in multi-player game
session. Finland: Department of Information
Processing Science. University of Oulu.
Masterson, J.T. (1996). Non-verbal communication in
text based virtual realities. An Unpublished
M.A. Thesis, University of Montana.
Maxim, L.A. and Nowicki S.J. (2003). Developmental
associations between non-verbal ability and
social competence. Journal of Philosophy,
Sociology and Psychology. Vol. 1, pp. 745-758.
Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Belmont: CA;
Wadsworth.
Mey, J.L. (1993). Pragmatics: An introduction. Molden:

Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Miller, P. (1988). Non-verbal communication: What
research says to the teacher. Washington D.C.:
National Education Association.
Rosa,

S.B. (2002). Understanding the role and
potential impact of non-verbal communication
in the
primary inclusion classroom. An
Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Graduate
School of the University of Massachusetts.

Stevick, E.W. (1982). Teaching
languages. Cambridge: CUP.

Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009

and

learning


12
Woolfolk, A.& Brooks, D. (1983). The influence of
teachers’

non-verbal


behaviours

on

students’ perceptions and performance.

In Gordon, E. (Ed.), Review of Research in
Education, Vol. 10, pp. 103-141. Washington
DC.

Journal of NELTA Vol. 1 4 No. 1-2 December
2009


Appendix 1 (Questionnaire)
Name (optional): ..................................................................................................
Name of the college (optional): ...........................................................................
Level: Please tick (ü)
In the following statements you will have to tell me about your feelings regarding the nonverbal message of your language teachers as you observe them in the classroom. Please go
through the statements carefully and tick (ü).
Under 1 if you strongly agree.
Under 2 if you agree.
Under 3 if you neither agree nor
disagree. Under 4 if you disagree and
Under 5 if you strongly disagree.
1.

Smiling teachers teach more effectively than those who

are always serious 1


2

3

4

5

2.It is easy to speak in front of those teachers who usually encourage students by
nodding their head. 1

2

3

4

5

3. Students feel nervous and embarrassed when the teacher indicates a particular student
while asking the question
1

2

3

4


5

4.It is hard to speak in front of those teachers who stare their
students coldly. 1 2

3

4

5

5.My friends avoid eye contacts when they do not know the answer of the
question asked. 1 2

3

4

5

6. I pay more attention when the teacher makes eye contacts with me
in the class. 1

2

3

4

5


7.Teachers make eye contacts only with the talented
students 1

2

3

4

5

8. Teachers tend to look away when a difficult topic is being
discussed. 1

2

3

4

5

9. My friends never take those closes seriously whose teachers are irregular or
unpunctual. 1
10.

2

2


5

3

4

5

The attractive personality and friendly style also contribute to teachers’

success and our learning 1 2
12.

4

My friends see their wrist watch when the teacher takes over

time in the class. 1
11.

3

3

4

5

My friends do not pay attention in the lecture when the teacher appears to be


fatigued and exhausted. 1 2

3

4

5

13. Attractive teachers are very intelligent and teach well.


1
14.

2

3

4

We enjoy the lecture of those teachers more who are physically smart,

attractive and well dressed. 1
15.

5

2


3

4

5

2

3

4

5

2

3

4

5

Teachers movement in the classroom keeps

students active 1 2
19.

4

Poor teachers make sounds such en/a: / time and again while explaining


the subject matter. 1
18.

3

My friends feel bore in those classes where the teacher teaches in

a monotonous tone. 1
17.

2

Sitting close to the teacher in the front row helps students in

understanding the lecture more. 1
16.

5

3

4

5

Students become more active if they are asked questions and

involved in discussions. 1 2


3

4

5

20. Students like those teachers who summarize the lesson
at the end. 1
21.

2

3

4

5

I like those teachers who illustrate the

subject matter. 1 2

3

4

5

22.I like those teachers who always give an
assignment/homework. 1 2


3

4

5

23.My friends like those teachers who tell the jokes and make
us laugh. 1

2

3

4

5

24.My friends like those teachers who ask questions time and again in
the class. 1

2

3

4

5

25.We like to work in pair/group in the classroom rather than listening the lectures

all the times. 1
*

2

3

NAND = Neither agree nor disagree

4

5